Ken Gurnick of MLB.Com is speculating that a possible Dodger trade partner, the Cincinnati Reds are coming to town. Gurnick speculates that the Dodgers have a possible interest in a few of the Reds bullpen arms.

It also has the Dodgers in search mode for bullpen help with the July 31 Trade Deadline approaching. In a stroke of timing, one club they've targeted is coming to town. The Cincinnati Reds, who arrive Monday night, have a bullpen of veterans that appeal to the Dodgers.

Primarily, that means closer Francisco Cordero, right-handed workhorse David Weathers and lefty specialist Arthur Rhodes. The Orioles also have some relievers that fit the Dodgers profile, most notably George Sherrill. - Ken Gurnick

Need:
First off, do the Dodgers need another arm in the bullpen? Well, that question can be best answered by meeting the following criteria.

1. Would any of the options available improve upon what you already have?
2. Are there any injury concerns with any of the top three or four members of the bullpen depth wise?

If both of these criteria are met, then it boils down to what players you would have to give up and what contract would you be taking over. Undoubtedly, the Dodgers could find a bullpen arm or two that would be an improvement over what they already have, but at what cost!?

Here is the current Dodger bullpen depth.

Name

Skinny

J.Broxton

Top closer. Lingering toe injury a concern.

R.Troncoso

Solid but not spectacular, probably not a worthy setup man at this point.

G.Mota

Has been lights out after a very rocky start.

J.McDonald

Best fit is in long relief.

S.Elbert

Will contribute more next year.

B.Leach

Left handed

J.Weaver

Spot starter and long relief specialist.

C.Vargas

Long relief guy, could be headed to minors.

R.Belisario

15 Day DL, with sprained elbow. Effective setup man first half of season.

H.Guo

Expected back any time, not sure what to expect. 2008 Setup Man of the Year!

C.Wade

15 Day DL, with shoulder sprain.

W.Ohman

DL, sore left shoulder.

Let's take a look at these names that Gurnick mentions to see which if any are options the Dodgers should be considering. With one added caveat though, I won't match the names with the stats until later as not to bias ourselves. Please don't cheat and look up the names that match these numbers! :)

Name

IP

K/9

BB/9

HR/9

BABIP

FIP

Contract

Player A

25.0

8.57

3.72

0.37

.279

3.23

09:$0.4M, FA

Player B

31.1

6.03

4.02

1.15

.220

4.70

09:$3.5M, 10:$3.7M club option ($0.4M buyout)

Player C

38.1

8.22

2.82

0.70

.270

3.33

09:$2.75M, Arb elig.

Player D

38.0

7.58

3.79

0.24

.250

2.96

08:$8.5M, 09:$12M, 10:$12M, 11:$12M, 12:$12M club option ($1M buyout)

Player E

48.1

8.57

3.72

0.37

.279

3.23

09:$0.5M, FA

Player F

31.1

7.76

4.02

0.57

.207

3.49

09:$2M, 10:$2M

Let's first take the time to weed out this list based on talent or lack there of. I am going to nominate Player B as the first pitcher kicked off of the island. Please say good-bye to David Weathers. That leaves us with five pitchers left.

Next, let's look at some of the contracts these guys have. You certainly don't want to saddle yourself with a terrible contract, especially from a bullpen pitcher. Remember, we already have the best closer in the game, so no need to overpay at this position. Player D quickly raises a red flag, with around $28M still gauranteed over the next two plus years. Let's eliminate this player from our list. Please say good-bye to Reds closer Francisco Cordero.

This leaves us with Players A,C,E,F. Things get a little harder as there is less and less difference between value and contracts here. I have to admit that I've placed two placebo pitchers among the list. Two of the remaining four pitchers in the list, are already members of the Dodgers bullpen. Player A is Jeff Weaver, and Player E is Ronald Belisario (currently on the DL). That narrows the field down to Player C and Player F.

A little more info on these two players is needed. Player C is right handed and 32 years old and under team control (arbitration) for one more year. Player F is left handed and is 39 years old and signed through the 2010 season. The Dodgers current left handed options are Brent Leach, Scott Elbert and HongZhi Guo. None of the three offer too much excitement for pitching high leverage innings, though Guo if healthy could be that pitcher, but I think by the time the trade deadline rolls around his health concerns will still be lingering.

I am going to call this one a draw, it's just too close to call. If I had to choose, I would give a slight edge to Player C over Player F, mostly due to the very low BABIP from Player F. Let's reveal who these last two players are. Player F is the 39 year old left handed setup man for the Reds, Arthur Rhodes. Player C is the 32 year old right handed reliever for the Orioles, George Sherril. Of the names thrown out in the Gurnick article, I'd only have interest in trading for Sherril and Rhodes. Of course, if the Orioles and Reds want too much for either of these two pitchers, then I wouldn't make the deal.

While the Dodgers do have injury issues in the bullpen, they are more of the nagging type. Still, the Dodgers have a lot at risk this year, as it's not every year you get to the end of July with the best record in all of baseball. It's not a bad idea to hedge against these nagging injury questions. The Dodgers still have a lot of above replacement level bullpen depth, nonetheless Arthur Rhodes (not just a lefty specialist) and George Sherril would both fit in to the 7th/8th inning high leverage role. Dangle some carrots Colleti, and see what it would take to get Sherril or Rhodes.

I despise the IBB as the most cowardly act in baseball. Indeed, it is not even sporting in the least. It’s like Roger Federer getting to choose to tell Andy Roddick once a game not to serve so darn hard. It’s like a goalie seeing Alex Ovechkin on a breakaway to force him to pass the puck behind him. - Tangotiger

Wow, talk about hyperbole! An IBB is a cowardly event? It's not even sporting in the least? I beg to differ. The intentional and even "non intentional" intentional walk are both strategical moves. Yes, the intentional walk is overused, misunderstood by most managers and rarely the correct course of action to take, but it's hardly a cowardly act. What about the pitcher intentionally throwing at a batter? Or sliding into second base to break up a double play spikes up? Or a player or manager throwing a hissy fit on the field, arguing a call? To me, those are the cowardly acts that I despise the most. Somewhere way down the list,... Oh, I don't know, perhaps sandwiched in between padding on the outfield walls and stopping games for swarming bees, is where I would put the IBB on the list of cowardly acts.

And I don't quite see the tennis analogy. A better tennis analogy (and I think as an Open level player in my 20s that this is up my alley), would be that Andy Roddick would always purposely serve to or hit the ball to Roger Federers backhand, or would always lob him, because his forehand and volleys are so good. It's the same thing as the IBB, it's a strategy. A strategy where you attempt to avoid your opponents strength to get at his weakness. It's not always, or perhaps ever a "good" strategy, but it's by no means a cowardly act. If every time Roger Federer served, Roddick yelled at him while Federer was in his service motion, then yes, I'd call that a cowardly or unsporting act.

When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but with creatures of emotion, creatures bristling with prejudice, and motivated by pride and vanity” - Dale Carnegie

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

The All-Star game gets a lot of criticism, most of it justified. The criticism that I would like to tackle, is that of the winning league of the All-Star game receiving home field advantage in the World Series. The commissioners office has two objectives to meet here. The first off is to make the All-Star game more "meaningful". The second, is to assign home field advantage in the World Series in an equitable way.

I am resigned to the fact that there may be no perfect way to assign home field advantage in the World Series. Each method has it's flaws, none as bad as the travesty that college football uses to determine who plays in it's National Championship game.

The most commonly mentioned methods for determining home field advantage in the All-Star game are...
1) The team with the best regular season record.
2A) The team with the best interleague record.
2B) The league with the best interleague record.
3) Alternating between leagues every year.
4) The league that wins the All-Star game.
5) Some variation of item #1, in which strength of schedule and or pythagorean record is taken into account.

The problem with using the best regular season record is that not all teams play the same strength of schedule, and that one could argue that all teams in the American League play against tougher competition than National League teams do. A variation of best record that takes into consideration strength of schedule and or pythagorean record would be more fair, but would also alienate most of the fans due to it's complexity.

A system using best interleague record is fraught with errors due to small sample size and often teams are matched up playing all or most of their interleague games vs one division in the opposite league. This is not fair to teams that play a tougher set of interleague games. A better way to measure which league is stronger based on actual games played, is to look at how each league as a whole did in interleague games.

Alternating between NL and AL every other year does a good job of splitting the home field advantage evenly between the two leagues, but does little to reward the team that won more games during the regular season.

Using the winner of the All-Star game to determine which league gets the home field advantage in the World Series is fatally flawed because the All-Star game itself is an exhibition, played with a different set of rules and limitations on players, and a flawed system for determining which players make up the All-Star teams. Think about this, what motivation do players on the Washington Nationals, San Diego Padres or Oakland A's have for winning the All-Star game? None, other than pride. If the All-Star game by itself is going to determine the home field advantage then only the most deserving players should be selected. Fans should have no say in who plays in the All-Star game. If the All-Star game is "for the fans", then don't also make it "for home field advantage" in the World Series.

So this begs the question, then what is the best or most fair way to determine home field advantage in the World Series, all the while making the All-Star game somewhat meaningful? My solution is that you use a combination of three of the items listed above. When the two teams qualify for the World Series, then you look at which league won the All-Star game, which of the two teams have the best overall record, and which league had the better interleague record.

For example in 2008, the Rays played the Phillies in the World Series, and the Rays had home field advantage due to the fact that the American League won the All-Star game. Under my system, you run through a quick three item checklist, awarding one point to the team or league that won that item.

Checklist
1) Which league won the All-Star game?
2) Which league had a better record during interleague play?
3) Which team had the better regular season record?

The Rays would've won all three items listed above. Headed into the All-Star break this year, the American League has already clinched the best record during interleague play, so a win in the All-Star game would clinch home field advantage in the World Series. A win by the National League, would make the best overall record of the two teams qualifying for the World Series as the final factor.

It is possible that interleague record and regular season record could be ties, so the case of a 1-1 tie, the winner of the All-Star game would then be the tie-breaker and cast the deciding vote.

While still not a perfect system, it does eliminate or atleast mitigate some of the flaws of each of the individual choices for determining home field advantage in the World Series. The All-Star game would still be "meaningful", yet no longer would all the HFA eggs be in one basket. The All-Star game could still allow for fan voting since it would now be only carrying a 1/3 weight. Finishing with the best overall record now becomes an important item in the World Series, and how strong your league is would now make a difference in terms of how well it does in interleague games.